Civilian deaths due to drone strikes
in Pakistan are falling rapidly, and the death rate is now close to
zero — or so asserts a New America Foundation (NAF) report.

The report
was authored by Peter Bergen and Jennifer Rowland of NAF, a public
policy think tank based in Washington, D.C. Bergen is the cable news
channel CNN’s national security analyst and a director of NAF, and
Rowland is a program associate.

The report states that since 2004, there have been 310 drone strikes
in northwest Pakistan, killing between 1,870 and 2,873 individuals, of
whom 1,577 to 2,402 were described as militants in reliable press
accounts. This would put the overall civilian fatality rate at 16%.

Bergen and Rowland say that they used data compiled by the NAF, and the most “reliable press sources” which include The New York Times, Reuters, The Washington Post, and the Associated Press, to name a few, and leading English media outlets in Pakistan: Dawn, Express Tribune, and Geo TV.

Chris Woods of the Bureau for Investigative Journalism (TBIJ)
believes that NAF has not only underestimated the number of strikes and
civilian deaths, but adds that civilian death percentages need to be
treated with extreme caution.

“It [NAF] relies only on a small number of media reports immediately
following a strike. Sometimes we learn crucial facts days, weeks, or
even months after an initial attack,” he told IPS.

“In February of this year, for example, a major investigation by
Associated Press, based on 80 eyewitness testimonies from civilians in
Waziristan, found previously unknown evidence of civilian deaths in 20%
of the sampled strikes. Unfortunately, NAF has not incorporated these
important findings into its data,” said Woods.

TBIJ’s own data puts the total number of drone strikes at 355, with a
minimum of 2,513 people killed, of whom between 482 and 835 were
civilians.

CNN’s controversial graph released with the report puts civilian deaths at zero for 2012.

Muhammad Idrees Ahmad, a sociologist and journalist, is scathing in his criticism of the report.

“NAF plays fast and loose with its statistics, and in some cases it
deliberately misreports,” he told IPS. “Two particularly egregious cases
where civilian casualties were actually reported even in the U.S. press
were either omitted or misreported in the database.”

For example, as reported by Ahmed for al-Jazeera, 82 children were
killed at a seminary in Bajaur on Oct. 30, 2006. The NAF database
continues to list the number as “80 militants.”

In another incident on Aug. 14, 2010, the AP reported seven civilian
deaths, which are still listed as seven “militant” deaths in the
database.

Likening Bergen’s report to propaganda, Ahmed argues that there are
no “reliable press accounts” when it comes to Pakistan’s Federally
Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). He says that the redefinition of the
term “militant” — which now encompasses any male citizen over the age of
18 in a combat zone — has not only skewed reporting figures, but also
given license to more indiscriminate targeting.

Not one to cut the Pakistani government any slack, Ahmed says that it
is in the interest of the United States as well as Pakistani
authorities to lowball the figures. Pakistani officials would want to
minimize public anger and outrage, and reporting militant deaths plays
well to this particular stance.

“The Pakistani government doesn’t even make an effort to confirm the
identity or category of the victims. I’ve asked people in FATA. They
confirm that no one from the Pakistani government/military ever visits
after an attack to confirm who the actual victims were. It’s convenient
to declare them all ‘militant,’” said Ahmed.

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism study of drone victims was conducted on only those cases where there were reliable press reports. In other words when there were tangible press and government reports to study. Many drone strikes are conducted in remote areas where there is no possible way to get reliable intelligence on drone victims. However using sampling methods investigators are able to determine with a fair degree of accuracy the number of civilian deaths.
The Brookings Institute study in 2009 of drone strikes in Pakistan found that 9 of 10 drone victims are civilian. A European study found that 95% of drone victims were civilian.

Andron

A wise man once said
"You can fool some of the people some of the time.
You can fool some of the people all of the time
BUT YOU CAN NEVER FOOL ALL OF THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME.
i HAVE NEVER SEEN SO MUCH BULL…. AS THIS CLAIM ABOUT CIVILIAN CASUALTIES.

james

This is complete bullshit, whoever wrote this must first define what a civilian is. They keep changing the definition when it suits their agenda's.
Killing an american soldier invader is terrorism, but killing a 15 year old girl is not just because she is "fighting age" and not a civilian. This world is really upside down.

George

Orwell would love this. By definition, everyone killed by a drone is a terrorist. If they were not a terrorist, then they would not have been killed by a drone. Thus, they must all be terrorists.

WTE

They are deploying drones in America as well.

james

If you deploy drones in your own country there would be no issues as the locals should rise and change this as they did in Egypt or accept it, die or move along. I am confident Americans can stop it if they chose to.
Doing this to other sovereign countries is illegal and amounts to real terrorism.

WTE

I hope we as Americans do rise and change this. Of course many go on about their day "feeling" safer Most Americans are tired of our government. Things like the NDAA, Fema Camps getting put up everywhere and now this:http://www.naturalnews.com/036452_laser_scanner_m…

Still using partial sentences. Why not put the question mark at the end, or the comment right before that where you wanted to burn a Christian church among other things, and I was wondering which you liked best?

WTE

Still using my words out of context and not explaining that the town beat a lady and burnt her house down because she did not belong to your christian cult?

You just are so lame lately, it's like you've been reduced to flimsy parallel profiles and empty talking points more than normal. Poor little wee wee.

WTE

Lame? It's because your constant stalking is getting boring. I mean how long are you going to keep up this pathetic stalking me from site to site you worthless POS? It;s borning me and you're not even a challenge. You're an irrelevant troll

You can call me a small man, but I am more of man than you will ever be. So what does that make you? My trained monkey. Now sit on here all day and refresh my ID page waiting for my next comment.
You Pathetic POS

A lot of farmers have goats. It takes a POS like you to think they are used for sex to steal them and have sex with them. You're just upset we have laws against that and you don't like things that makes this country great.

Roger 165p • 6 minutes ago
No, you know I'm not for the things that made this country great.

But you still are more ashamed of your religious loyalties than of your sex toy goats.

WTE

Why woudl I deny it? It was all fun and games. They don't allow goats in my condo. So bascially I have shown that when you think about goats you think about beastality, you're a liar, and if given the chance you would steal

My my, little itty bitty wee wee is still in a snit because he admitted to having sex toys that were goats. How embarrassing for you. Does this mean you lose points down at the troll workshop?

WTE

My, my, worthless POS. I never admitted to a thing. You assumed before you illegally entered my property and stole from that is what the goats were for. Which means you have a sick perverted mind. You need taken out back behind the barn and put down with a 45. After a fair trial of course

They were accused of that, they were not convicted. You are showing your sharia mindset by presuming guilt over innocence.

Your muslim loyalties leak out when you least expect them. It's not just the way you admitted to the sex toy goats and got defensive over them like a jealous lover.

WTE

You afr having a fantasy about goats. Is that all you talk about. You sick minded POS. I challenge you to prove your comment about my so called "goats". You will need some sort of evididence pictures, video

You just can't get anything right, can you? What a tiny little man you are. Is it time for you to go 'visit' the goats again or something? You sound so 'tense'.

WTE

Nope, time for me to go back to this christian web site and comment. They have a great blog that does not have ID. They are real christians for me to show the error of their ways and explain to them how their religion along with islam is all a bunch of BS.

How is the coptic church not existing for you? How is Pilate being governer there and being a patron saint not working for you?

How is all the other stuff that you pretend doesn't matter?

You are simply a hate filled troll.

WTE

What does Pilate founding a church have to do with him seeing jesus. Joseph Smith founded a church why do you deny him? Matthew and John the stories themselves cannot serve as examples of eyewitness accounts since they came as products of the minds of the unknown authors, and not from the characters themselves

Yes, you can tell by the reviews that people such as yourself didn't' even read it. There were two groups in those reviews.

Those small little men like you among other liberals who didn't read it, then those that did read it and enjoyed it. So you made up a review, when you're a hate filled bigot I would expect it. Too bad like your comments here, you just used hate filled bigotry instead of knowing what you were writing about.